A decisive British victory might just see the border disputes resolved in favor of Britain. Northern Maine was already mentioned (I wonder how Massachusettes would react to the Feds giving up some of their State), maybe on the Great Lakes too. I could see the 49th Parallel extending only to the Columbia, which would be the border of the Pacific Northwest. I suppose they could force the US to give up its claim on Oregon entirely, at least for the short term.
War of 1812 - American defeat?
- Thread starter General Mosh
- Start date
The area in question being "their state" is contested, that's the whole reason it's called a border dispute.
(eye roll at Massachusettsians who would say otherwise).BootOnFace: The US is still far weaker than Britain. Good luck winning "that one".
that's a thorny issue on here. My own opinion is that it was a draw, since it was a negotiated peace that led to the status quo being resumed, no concessions from either side on anything. One book I have on the war claims that the USA won, due to everything that happened after the war, but that's really stretching it. There was a clear loser in the war... the native Americans. Part of the reason the war was fought was that the Americans wanted the natives in their newly purchased territory to be treated as dependents, while the Brits were going for treating them as sovereign peoples. The American view prevailed.
Dave Howery wrote:
But that's exactly what Britain was fighting for! There's an old analogy, but a good one: if you are walking down the street and a mugger attacks you intending to steal your wallet, and you beat him senseless and go on your way, I don't think you could say the encounter was 'indecisive' simply because you chose not to take the mugger's wallet!
But that's exactly what Britain was fighting for! There's an old analogy, but a good one: if you are walking down the street and a mugger attacks you intending to steal your wallet, and you beat him senseless and go on your way, I don't think you could say the encounter was 'indecisive' simply because you chose not to take the mugger's wallet!
Superaquaspiderbatman
Banned
I've heard people say that the US DID lose OTL. I guess it's a matter of how exactly one defines "losing"
As I said, it's a thorny issue on here. Most of the books I've read that discusses the war (written by real historians instead of us amateurs) call it a draw; one book calls it a US win, but that's stretching it. Britain did have some goals beyond just 'the status quo', but they were minor, mostly involving the status of the natives and some adjustments in territory in the north, but war weariness and failure to capture Baltimore nudged them into peace agreements pretty soon. The War of 1812 reminds me a lot of the Korean War, where the two sides saw a rise and fall of fortunes, and everything ended up right where they started...David S Poepoe
Banned
Usually people look at the ability to accomplish one's military/political goals, which the US never did. The Americans failed in their invasion of Canada, the impressment issue was terminted by the British - on their own accord - before the outbreak of war and the British had no intention of reconquering the US anyway. The British did burn Washington. The Battle of New Orleans happened after the signing of the peace treaty.
Well its very disputed as to what the actual outcome is, it depends on who you talk to. I guess I'd define "winning" as the winning side getting concessions, and people generally being able to agree that they did win the war.
To quote an earlier poster:
How much more of a defeat for the mugger do you want?
The Kiat
I think what Elfwine meant is that if there was a war in the 1840's then Britain is so much stronger than the US that the latter would be lucky to come out of such a conflict without further losses and taking any of Canada would require virtually ASB levels of oddities occurring.
Steve
Yes. Sometimes I don't quote a post and just address the user as a "I don't want to make two posts to reply to two separate people" sort of thing.
libbrit
Banned
You mean the US didn't lose in real life?
I'll be right back, I just need to inform the Oxford English Dictionary.
Victory is now defined as "having your capital city occupied, the home of your head of state burned down, and failing in one of your main war aims- to occupy Canada"
Who knew...
I'll be right back, I just need to inform the Oxford English Dictionary.
Victory is now defined as "having your capital city occupied, the home of your head of state burned down, and failing in one of your main war aims- to occupy Canada"
Who knew...
Elfwine
Took me a while to understand this but I think you're saying if Americans sought to invade a sovereign nation and loot its citizens the US government and army would go to war to support them?
The intervention of the US army against them was vital to defeating the local tribes. However that was against small groups inside what was inside internationally recognised US territory and that the government felt free to break treaties with. Its a hell of a lot different deciding to piss off the world's current super-power by sending your army to attack its territory and subjects.
There are likely to be occasional border tensions and possibly even clashes. However, especially after a clear defeat in 1812 it would be a very rash US leader who would pick a fight with Britain in this period.
Steve
Based on the actual US goals it is hard to interpret the results of this war as not being an American defeat.
Hey, this is the US we're talking about. The notion that the first war we lost was in Vietnam (and that only because of Cowardly Civilians Not Willing to Fight Another Twenty Years) is very important to our image of ourselves.
stevep: At the very least, the US is going to pursue an anti-British policy. And while the US in the 1810s is feeble, the US in the 1860s - even if you exclude this territory and even the territory gained fighting Mexico in the 1840s - is going to be a lot closer.
I don't think keeping American settlers out is going to be worth it over the long haul.
This. The actual outcome IOTL can be counted as sort of an American defeat, though clearly not a crushing one.
I would say fairly crushing in terms of US goals not achieved and instead lost to the British.
libbrit
Banned
If the UK started a war which involved the occupation of London and the burning of 10 Downing Street and/or Buckingham Palace, id be fairly sure it would be a crushing defeat.
Actually what you are calling Northern Maine was Massachusetts during the war of 1812.